Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Indian Casinos?

Their claim to the rights to the fish in all of the lakes in East Central Minnesota supersedes ours. It comes from a legal agreement we made to get their land. Do they need to net the lake? Probably not. Are they responsible for the walleye decline? According to the info I have seen, also probably not. If they were to net the last walleye out of the lake we'd have no bitch coming. It's the deal we made. The 1837 treaty is what covers Mille Lacs and ECM It covers the land from roughly Forest Lake over to St Cloud up to Brainerd the over to Danbury. It moved them onto a small piece of land on the SW corner of Mille Lacs. There are a few other pieces of reservation lands like next to the Kettle on Highway 48 and North of 48 along the St Croix within the 1837 treaty area. I am not familiar with all of them. If they chose to do so, they could legally net the bejesus out of all of the lakes from Forest lake to North of Hinckley and over to Brainerd. They do not need our permission or approval. Nor does it have anything to do with their survival. It is their resource to come and use as they choose to or not. Personally, I have taken literally tons of fish out of those lakes over my life. Mille Lacs itself has had a number of ups and downs prior to their exercising of their rights. During the 70s and 80s it was commonly referred to as the dead sea.

Lastly, there is general consensus that netting is not the cause of the decline. Mille Lacs walleyes are still producing plenty of fry. The fry just are not surviving to catching/netting size.

Thanks for your reply. I feel the tribal members up in the Mille Lacs area have a sustainable source of income in the casino operations there. Their netting of walleyes on Mille Lacs is not necessary for their survival, and it's time it stopped. The walleye population has plunged, and it's happened while they continue to net the lake.

My wife and I were visiting relatives in northern Wisconsin and we saw bumper stickers that read "Save a Walleye...Spear an Indian". That was surprising. Evidently if you're an Indian you can spear spawning fish. That can't be good for sustaining fish populations. I asked about it at Gas stations we stopped at, and it seemed like it was a real sore spot for the local non-Indians. IMO, regarding treaties that were signed, that was THEN and this is NOW. The treaties should have had an expiration date. We're all Americans now. JMO

REALLY??? EXPIRATION DATE???? REALLY???

You would kick the people living on Indian lands out at the expiration of the treaty? It's either that or letting the Indians evict them. That has to be just about the least well thought out idea I have heard in a long time.

Think on this for just a second... The treaty expires. The Indians file a motion in court and all the whites living in the ceded areas are summarily evicted by our own troops if necessary, and now it doesn't matter in the least how many fish are in the lake because the Indians own them all and we have no say in the matter whatsoever. How doe that solution fix things?

[quote=shootbrownelk]
My wife and I were visiting relatives in northern Wisconsin and we saw bumper stickers that read "Save a Walleye...Spear an Indian". That was surprising. Evidently if you're an Indian you can spear spawning fish. That can't be good for sustaining fish populations. I asked about it at Gas stations we stopped at, and it seemed like it was a real sore spot for the local non-Indians. IMO, regarding treaties that were signed, that was THEN and this is NOW. The treaties should have had an expiration date. We're all Americans now. JMO

My opinion. YMMV.and Jimmy Crack Corn.

No, you don't. At least not like back in the 50s and 60s when they were still hauling kids off to the boarding schools. I spent a few days on White Earth a year or so back and the difference was really surprising. Places like Ponsford are nothing like what they used to be.

They may well have a lot of problems left to solve, there may be a pretty high level of chemical dependency, but life in general has gotten a lot better for them. A lot better.

Personally, I look at it like this: They are have problems learning to manage money. Not surprising at all when you look at the whites who never had a pot to piss in coming into a lot of money that they did not have to invest a lifetime of work to obtain. With a couple hundred generations of living a day to day subsistence life and then in one generation it all changes it would be surprising as hell if they didn't have a lot of problems.

Well I wasn't alive in the '50's and '60's so I can't speak for how it was. I can only speak for how I observe it today. Do you think the SS casino is responsible for the magic turn around from the '50's and 60's?

Thanks for your reply. I feel the tribal members up in the Mille Lacs area have a sustainable source of income in the casino operations there. Their netting of walleyes on Mille Lacs is not necessary for their survival, and it's time it stopped. The walleye population has plunged, and it's happened while they continue to net the lake.

"If we are going to solve problems like this, it will be science that provides the answers"
Miles: I agree with you that science is the answer to rational decisions regarding complicated issues. Please show me the unbiased scientific research on the impact of spearing large egg laden female walleys prior to spawning with the taking of that same walleye after spawning is complete and the season for whites is open? Please show how this impact is incorporated into the annual pounds of fish quota allowed for whites and indians. Thank you.

The State of Nevada sets up the odds for all casinos in the state. For all you indian gamblers, who sets the odds in indian casinos? Ever see the odds published any where?

Smoke: Glad you are able to take advantage of below market priced motel rooms subsidized by indian casinos. Regarding your other questions, my understanding of distribution of casino profits from indian gambling operations is based upon sharing a deer camp with a retired Air Force Master Sargent who is a band member and also conversations with the comptroller of a different band's casino. To further appreciate that this is not just a local problem you only need to google for lawsuits regarding the issue of indian profit distribution.

Miles this is from the analysis of the Dakota War of 1862 from the U of Minnesota: "In April 1863, Minnesota voided its treaties with the Dakota and sent those living in the camps to Nebraska. Soon after, Congress passed legislation making it illegal for the Dakota to live in Minnesota. It remains a law to this day". With regard to your strict interpretation of the language of treaties with no regard for the influence of modern technology, how do you feel about shootbrownelk's statement: "Think on this for just a second... The treaty expires. The Indians file a motion in court and all the whites living in the ceded areas are summarily evicted by our own troops if necessary, and now it doesn't matter in the least how many fish are in the lake because the Indians own them all and we have no say in the matter whatsoever. How does that solution fix things? " Just reverse the words white and indian. Seems less harsh than Bud Grant's solution regarding war parties off the reservation.